View Comments

• Herculean effort there Jay commensurate with self -flagellation. Not too many people would tackle something like this. Well done.

  • Thank you, Frank :)

    • Hi Jay,
      I read a lot of your very detailed and helpful reviews. Very much appreciate your efforts which often offers very helpful insights.
      Did you ever test the oyaide db510 which was proposed to me by a friend?
      I have mutec ref 10 with Sotm trifecta and uptone isoregen as well as uptone etherregen.
      I also have questions regarding usb and power cable.
      Regards
      Olaf

• Thank you for your fascinating survey. This is a whole lot of audiophile goodness - a detailed discussion of cable sound - not only cable sound, but digital cable sound! Numerous times over the years I have been "informed" by scientific types and narrow minded types that digital cables cannot possibly make any difference. I've pointed out that you can change the digital cable sound by putting things on the outside of the cable - a ferrite choke (not so good), a Shun Mook cable Jacket (wonderful). You can often improve the sound of a given cable with mechanical damping as well.

  I've used many digital cables over the past 25 years and have built several. Despite my best efforts, I was unable to build anything that could match even a $100 audiophile brand cable. I've made cables which DIYers claim beat everything on the market.

  I noticed that Monoprice has a cable made with the superior RG-6 (vs the RG-59) which is just a few dollars more. That one might be worth trying.

  I currently use a Stereovox SPDIF TO my modified Monarchy jitterbug and a Harmonic Tech FROM the jitterbug, which is the best I have here and works well for me. I use these cables with Bybee plugs (running the digital signal through a Bybee filter) and Shun Mook Cable Jackets.

  • Cybershaft makes a very inexpensive option. only around $30 each plus shipping. Would love to hear your thoughts.http://www.cybershaft.jp/option01/option_bnc1.html

• "Some are grainier but have better tonality while others will be smoother with a more porcelain tone." You cannot increase gain with a coax cable. You can minimize signal loss. As for tonality,, if we are talking about digital AES signals tonality doesn't even come into play. The coax cable is simply transmitting a digital signal from one point to another. These cables only have to meet the basic requirements of AES transmission. Remember that in a digital signal the information is either there or it's not there. Sure if you buy some total garbage Chinese cable there's a chance that it may not meet the basic specifications required for transmission. Also if the cable is on a particularly long run you may have to go with a larger cable. In the broadcast world we use RG6 in these scenarios. If we are talking about the cables ability to transmit a Broadband signal, yes some are going to be better than others. Of course this means going Beyond the specifications required. I would love to see these cables tested out on a spectrum analyzer with actual scientific results. In this case I would expect that some of the higher-end cables would be capable of higher bandwidth transmission exceeding their specifications. But that will be the only difference.

  • Another ignorant comment from someone who chooses to listen with a scope as opposed to their own ears. Feel free to go back into your cave and don’t bother coming out. Your tired theories are not welcome here.

    • Rob,
      James G. made several claims. Instead of getting upset and telling him to go into a cave for a while, could you clarify which of the following were made from a place of ignorance, or why they are tired theories?

      1- You cannot increase gain with a coax cable.
      2- The coax cable is simply transmitting a digital signal from one point to another
      3- In a digital signal the information is either there or it’s not there, (1 or 0 has no tonal coloring possible)
      4- Cables that have high broadband and adequate broadband still transmit the same digital signal. The only cables that mathematically will be different are ones under spec.

      The whole point of why digital has transformed the information transfer in the world is it takes away any coloring from "shades of grey" that was inherent in analog. This is not even an "which sounds better analog vs digital" or "which DACs sounds warmer", or "which type of driver reproduces the sound the bass the best." Those are arguably much harder to test difference. Since we are in the digital black and white realm It is as simple as did the 1010111010010 that was transmitted equal the same 1010111010010 when it was received.

      • Frankie,

        This is not about ones and noughts. Specifically with the dual BNC connectors between the Chord Blu Mk2 MScaler and the Dave DAC it is about using the cables to filter out RF common mode noise produced by the MScaler. The Blu Mk2 MScaler and Dave are awesome with just standard BNC cables but when the RF noise is removed it really produces the 'icing on the cake'.

        My WAVE STORM Reference cables remove all the RF noise and the resulting darkness and depth of sound is so obvious that can be almost too much for some listeners who crave the false detail and shimmer produced by the RF noise. Hence I think the comments in the review where some slightly brighter cables are preferred but what you get with my cables is 100% of the digital signal and nothing else. If the sound is too dark then that is because that is on the master tape. Keep listening and the ear / brain will adjust and reveal the true fine detail which was being masked by the RF noise.

        Many other devices have RF noise and that is why cables which filter the RF are so beneficial within a system, not only between Blu Mk2 / Dave but also elsewhere.

      • Frankie, they are tired theories and remarks because they are useless. We still have to listen to the cables before we choose.

    • Does anyone disagree that subjective individual assessments are less consistent and reliable than repeatable scientific measurements of the same information? I’d like someone to try to convince me that this is untrue.

      • Two cables could measure nearly the same - and have a completely different sound.

    • James's comment was filled with facts, science. Your response is some audiophile religious faith, and insult. If anyone should go back to a cave it is you Rob.

  • James, I hope you are the chosen one to prove your prediction. Especially considering how much you would like to see the results.

• Have you ever done a comparison on different brands of green magic markers?

  • You're a dick!

• Thanks so much for the comprehensive review Jay, I certainly found it very helpful.

  And one last thing, ignore 'em haters.

• Jay,

  You have completed a huge task which I have never even seen attempted by anyone else. Well done.

  Obviously I am pleased that you and your fellow listeners liked our Storm Reference BNC cables but my take on any supposed missing 'sparkle' is that the sparkle referred to is being generated by RF noise. In the process of developing the cables I initially removed some of the ferrites and did indeed get back some of that sparkle or shimmer. After extended listening I realised that I was fooling myself and that it was false detail in the music. So I reverted back to the current version of the cables which suck out as much RF noise as they can find. Remember that we are not altering any of the original digital music signal here so the production version of the WAVE cables must be truer to the music encoded in the digital signal ie without the RF. If that signal lacks sparkle or shimmer then that is what you will hear with the WAVE cables. However, and remember that I listen to these cables for up to 10 hours per day, every day, I prefer the fine detail in the top end that is left after the artificial shimmer or sparkle of the RF noise is removed.

  I am not surpised that your listening experience with the WAVE cables resulted in what you say. Indeed it is a welcome and very accurate summary of what I hear myself but hopefully you will appreciate that it is intended and I have no intention of altering the cables because that would reintroduce the very RF noise that I have been to careful to keep out of any downstream digital to analogue devices.

  Have a rest, you deserve it.

  kind regards, Nick.

• It will be interesting to see also the review of Habst cable comparing to the high-end cables here.

• Thanks for the great review and the amount of time and effort you put into this review. I would like to see two more affordable cables evaluated. They are the UIT SPDIF cable and the Moon Audio Silver Dragon MKII SPDIF cable.

  I would now like to address some comments.

  I certainly can understand a person having difficulty relating to sonic differences in cables when there are no measurements to back it up. I still have difficulty wrapping my head around the idea that ab 8 inch piece of Curious USB cable makes such a difference compared to the free on I got from Chord Electronics with my Mojo DAC. I've done blind listening tests with friends and they can tell the difference. I liked the cable and don't regret my purchase.

  A few years back I was reading one of Paul's Post,s written by Paul McGowan of PS Audio. Paul was talking about how PS Audio had stated that the PS Audio Directstream DAC was immune to differences in properly designed USB cables. Ted Smith, the designer of the Directstream DAC (No dummy himself) concurred. McGowan then writes, "Along comes this JCAT cable." He then went on to elaborate the improvements the JCAT cable made in the PS audio reference system. He said that it drove him crazy, because from an Engineering standpoint, it shouldn't be so. I've been to PS Audio in Boulder, CO, and they have more than a spectrum analyzer at their disposal. I don't believe that Paul McGowan or Ted Smith ever came up with any measurement to back up what they were hearing. PS Audio does not sell JCAT cables, and has no reason whatsoever to endorse the JCAT product. They just had to eat their words about their DAC being immune to differences in properly designed USB cables. They showed great integrity in doing so.

  SPDIF cables and USB Cables (when used in computer audio) are one way devices. There is no error checking for packets, or re-sent packets like there is with downloads or when you send a document to a printer.

  Bkuhuna, CD Stoplight is meant to be used on CDs, not cables. An old, modestly effective treatment edge treatment for CDs. Not a knockout.

  Another story. The late Julian Hirsch, the father of audio equipment testing, once measured a Mark Levinson amp, preamp, and special cables. He was a strict by the measurements guy, and very respected. He did not use any of the audio vocabulary invented by Harry Pearson. Julian Hirsch concluded his review by stating that he heard a "Gold Plated Sound" he could not explain with measurements, but he also could not deny. This was the first an only time he made such a statement. Julian Hirsch was a man of great integrity.

  Measurements are important, and do explain some of the audible differences in components. Unfortunately some things are not measurable at this time. Transient Intermodulation Distortion was once unknown. Proponents of Harmonic Distortion measurements claimed that their measurements proved that the listening fatigue amplifier owners complained of had no basis in fact.
  There are today, still proponents of THD measurements , who use them to prove there are no sonic differences between components . John Curl and Matti Otala invented the TIM measurement. It proved that some amplifiers with excellent THD and IM distortion measurements exhibited high levels of TIM distortion. The amplifier owners complaints of harshness and listening fatigue was not a figment of their imagination after all. The Human ear prevailed. This changed amplifier design, to include sufficient slew rate and avoiding over use of negative feedback. The human ear is more sophisticated than some people give it credit for.

  I have a recommendation for Bkhuna and Mr. Greer. The Audio Science Review Forum would be a much better group for individuals who are measurements only minded. They will be glad to have you join their discussions. I think you will enjoy it.

  • I'll try to get those cables in. Thank you for the recs.

    I'm probably one of the few reviewers with a BS in EE and have probably measured more in my lifetime than most speculators. I initially called for measurements but it became very obvious that it'll be more prudent to listen first - and measure later. Find equipment you enjoy. Look up measurements. Then, if it matters to you, find how out those measurements correleates to your emotional enjoyment. The complexity of how we hear are still being studied (Laurel vs Yanny) and I have a feeling we have lot more to learn.

• I need 5 BNC terminated 75 ohm cables to carry clock signals from an external clock to my digital stack. Which of these cables would you recommend for clock signals, i.e., which is the most accurate?

  • I'll go over this in my upcoming master clock reviews. I tried all of these cables on a Mutec REF10 and SOtM sCLK-OCX10. In short, you still get the same "character" of each cable in the signal path along with tighter focus and a lighter tone (imparted by the clock). Interestingly enough, the clock cables matter much more than the power cord on the clock. Anyway, I'll go in more depth later.

• Great review. Sticks it to the cable deniers.